Orri,
Orri Erling wrote:
> SPARQL RQ 25 Notes
>
>
> Here are some initial comments.
>
> While reading the document, I found the following typos:
>
>
> dervived
Can't find it - which version are you reading?
> equivilent
Fixed (Eric in sec 11 in case you have a separate copy)
> displacment
Fixed (Eric in sec 11 in case you have a separate copy - data was wrong but
not the query in 11.4.10bis)
>
>
> At the start of 4.4, readability could be better. The casual reader gets
> confused about basic and group graph patterns. Since I had not myself
> written our SPARQL parser, I had to go to the grammar to see the point.
Added a note to do something about this so the point isn't lost.
>
> It should be said somewhere at the start that:
>
> Basic graph pattern consists of zero or more triple patterns. For the
> pattern to match, all vvvariables and blank node labels must be bound so
> that triples corresponding to the bindings exist in the data. If a basic
> graph pattern is empty, it has one solution and produces no bindings.
Added a note so this does not get lost.
> Also, the point about the scope of a blank node label should be reiterated a
> few times in the text, something like:"
>
> {{_:b1 foaf:name "Alice"} {_:b1 foaf:mbox ?box}}
>
> is not the same as
>
> {_:b1 foaf:name "Alice" . _:b1 foaf:mbox ?box}
>
> because the scope of a blank node label does not go outside of a basic graph
> pattern.
If we go with the proposal arising from the last telecon, we add:
4.1.4
"""
The same blank node label may not be used in two separate basic graph patterns.
"""
and also I've added a new "A.6 Blank Node Labels" so this can also be put near
the grammar.
> Orri
>
Thanks for the review,
Andy